Kim Dotcom predicts victory in war with Hollywood

Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom is confined to his mansion near Auckland as he waits for the New Zealand courts to decide whether to extradite him to the United States. But that didn't stop him from penning a defiant open letter to Hollywood.

"The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common," Dotcom said in the letter published by the Hollywood Reporter. "Instead of changing their views to fit the facts, they try to change the facts to fit their views."

The Megaupload founder portrayed himself as a misunderstood technological visionary and compared Megaupload to the VCR. "You get so comfortable with your ways of doing business that any change is perceived as a threat," he wrote. "The VCR frightened you, but it ended up making billions of dollars in video sales." He suggested that Hollywood should have adapted to locker sites like Megaupload rather than trying to destroy them.

Dotcom claimed that Hollywood is behind the American government's campaign against Megaupload. And he predicted that the campaign would ultimately fail.

Megaupload, he said, was used by a wide variety of users that "spanned from the military to Hollywood to lawyers and doctors." He predicted those users will rally to his side. "The people of the Internet will unite. They will help me. And they are stronger than you. We will prevail in the war for Internet freedom," Dotcom claimed.

Dotcom also expressed anger at how he has been treated.

"You can't just engage armed forces halfway around the world, rip a peaceful man from his family, throw him in jail, terminate his business without a trial, take everything he owns without a hearing, deprive him of a fair chance to defend himself, and do all that while your propaganda machine is destroying him in the media," Dotcom wrote.

Dotcom has a point. His company has been effectively moribund since January, despite the fact that he hasn't been convicted of any crime. And last month, a New Zealand court ruled that the raid on his home had been conducted with an invalid search warrant, rendering the action illegal. But it remains to be seen whether government missteps will be sufficient to save Dotcom from extradition and conviction.

Dotcom is entirely right.Hollywood studios operate as an illegal cartel. They fix prices, violate RICO and racketeering laws, operate a blacklist, and boast (via their MPAA henchman Chris Dodd) of having politicians in their pockets. (I have personal experience of this as a working film director and screenwriter).Go Dotcom!

It's nice to see the finite resources of our government being put to such good use. It's not like we have an economy being decimated by Wall Street, foreign wars draining our bank accounts, a badly misguided/executed war on drugs, etc. For once the Fed is doing the right thing and cracking down on the menace that is file sharing.

I think he's being VERY overly optimistic. I think the best he can hope for is that they leave him a broken man with no money, but also no jail time. Worst case scenario he owes them everything and possibly goes to jail.

The sad thing is that I agree with him that locker services should have different rules governing them. It's dumb that the *AA expect locker companies to get licenses just to hold files for me that belong to me. It's sad because he's the worst possible argument for this because of the file sharing they encouraged.

I think he's being VERY overly optimistic. I think the best he can hope for is that they leave him a broken man with no money, but also no jail time. Worst case scenario he owes them everything and possibly goes to jail.

The sad thing is that I agree with him that locker services should have different rules governing them. It's dumb that the *AA expect locker companies to get licenses just to hold files for me that belong to me. It's sad because he's the worst possible argument for this because of the file sharing they encouraged.

Which is exactly why Hollywood picked him. They knew he had a shandy past and figured it would be easy to snowball the US and NZ officials into convicting him, all so that they could effectively strongarm any site in the world that stores or shares user files. Fortunately, they were just [i}so[/i] sure of themselves, they'd gotten to all the right officials, that they could brush all of the mistakes and fumbles under the rug and still get the conviction they wanted.

Seriously, that's how their world works in the eyes of Hollywood execs; they don't care what they do because they pay lots of people to clean all of the messes up for them and make everything right. They have everything from maids, personal assistants, accounts and lawyers to lobbyist, media news, regulators, congressmen and judges--all to clean up their mistakes and do whatever the fuck they're told.

Dotcom is entirely right.Hollywood studios operate as an illegal cartel. They fix prices, violate RICO and racketeering laws, operate a blacklist, and boast (via their MPAA henchman Chris Dodd) of having politicians in their pockets. (I have personal experience of this as a working film director and screenwriter).Go Dotcom!

For a megalomaniacal, douchebaggy John Galt sailing his pirate ship into the center of the maelstrom, Dotcom does have a point. He'll be ruined, but the US justice department and IP cartels will have egg on their faces, and following this path slavishly would ruin the US and the world.

Ugh...I'm torn. The guy is bullshit and I don't want to rally around his cause. But the government's actions are insane and deserve to be slapped down.

Simply rally for lawful governance. If you ever had to face a judge for multiple felonies, would you rather have a judge and prosecution that followed the evidence and rule of law or did anything to get a conviction--reality and legality be damned--simply because they think you deserve it?

I think he's being VERY overly optimistic. I think the best he can hope for is that they leave him a broken man with no money, but also no jail time. Worst case scenario he owes them everything and possibly goes to jail. (...)

To Dotcom: No good deeds go unpunished. Face the trial for the wrong Megaupload has allowed, pay a fine and carry on.

The only thing they "allowed" was users to upload and share files. Do you really expect them to police all uploads, to trace down the copyright holder for every bit of every file to see if the uploader has the legal copyright for them? And NO, fingerprinting schemes don't work, especially for file lockers and sharing sites. Unlike videos on youtube, there's no reliable way to peer into files in any of the thousands of different formats, or even encrypted archives, to determine if they have unlawfully copied content. This can ONLY be determined on a file by file basis. And just like video fingerprints, any bans that prevent uploading a file based on IDs would also prohibit all lawful uses of the file on the service as well.

To Dotcom: No good deeds go unpunished. Face the trial for the wrong Megaupload has allowed, pay a fine and carry on.

The only thing they "allowed" was users to upload and share files. Do you really expect them to police all uploads, to trace down the copyright holder for every bit of every file to see if the uploader has the legal copyright for them? And NO, fingerprinting schemes don't work, especially for file lockers and sharing sites. Unlike videos on youtube, there's no reliable way to peer into files in any of the thousands of different formats, or even encrypted archives, to determine if they have unlawfully copied content. This can ONLY be determined on a file by file basis. And just like video fingerprints, any bans that prevent uploading a file based on IDs would also prohibit all lawful uses of the file on the service as well.

I agree in part with you, I never said that there should be some sort of per file moderation. I just said that Megaupload provided some "allowance of improper sharing of copyrighted material" - by improper, I don't mean the simple upload of a file, improper means without the _required licensing_ in case of someone uploaded a third party owned file.

I don't know the terms of the original EULA for Megaupload, but it seems that the system and the EULA were a bit loose on this matter - were it not, there would be at least some sort of alert to those who were to download a file, and I don't remember seeing such warnings before getting a file from another user.

Hollywood has already won. They got what they wanted. Megaupload is shut down and won't be back for a very long time. It's only a small victory, as there are many other similar sites, but they got the big fish, and made all the smaller fish quite scared.

Unless Dotcom wins in court, and then somehow manages to sue the US and/or Hollywood and/or New Zealand to get some money back as compensation for all that he's lost, he won't win. He has already lost his current venture.

Hollywood 1 - 0 MegauploadHollywood 0.5 - 0 Dotcom.

Unless there is a SERIOUS change in US laws because of the entire process which has occurred here, Hollywood can't lose, it can only be a tie at best.

They picked a hell of a guy to make a martyr. Way to go RIAA, MPAA, et.al.

And, he's right. Instead of pursuing online models, like *cough* god forbid someone be able to rent/watch a movie in the privacy of their own home on opening night for $10 instead of having to go to a fucking movie theatre *cough* ... instead they purused outlandish laws which trolling lawyers have used to extort money from citizens, and have put the thumb-screws to someone just for torrenting an mp3.

If I was charged $50k for shop-lifting some bubble-gum out of the store, and giving each of my friends a piece of it, I'd be appalled. But, the laws against online piracy are that outlandish. They dug this hole, and all this case is doing is showing how outlandish that hole is, and how in the pocket our gov't is. The way they handled this case shows that there's a bias in the justice system. They can snap their fingers and shut someoen down for long periods of time even on just an allegation of guilt, not actual guilt. They can play the court long enough to financially drain a person into giving up. Overall, it's just pulling the curtain back on how messed up our legal system has gotten.

Ugh...I'm torn. The guy is bullshit and I don't want to rally around his cause. But the government's actions are insane and deserve to be slapped down.

The government is the puppet in this scenario. The puppetmasters ... that's who you should "gun" for. Sad state of affairs in this country when we find ourselves in a plutocracy and the elites enjoy the misdirection offered by a bumbling fool of a government while they unabashedly carry on their criminal activities in the background.

They picked a hell of a guy to make a martyr. Way to go RIAA, MPAA, et.al.

And, he's right. Instead of pursuing online models, like *cough* god forbid someone be able to rent/watch a movie in the privacy of their own home on opening night for $10 instead of having to go to a fucking movie theatre *cough* ... instead they purused outlandish laws which trolling lawyers have used to extort money from citizens, and have put the thumb-screws to someone just for torrenting an mp3.

If I was charged $50k for shop-lifting some bubble-gum out of the store, and giving each of my friends a piece of it, I'd be appalled. But, the laws against online piracy are that outlandish. They dug this hole, and all this case is doing is showing how outlandish that hole is, and how in the pocket our gov't is. The way they handled this case shows that there's a bias in the justice system. They can snap their fingers and shut someoen down for long periods of time even on just an allegation of guilt, not actual guilt. They can play the court long enough to financially drain a person into giving up. Overall, it's just pulling the curtain back on how messed up our legal system has gotten.

In other words, they are reading "collective rights and freedom" as _companies-only_ rights [over individuals freedom].

Ugh...I'm torn. The guy is bullshit and I don't want to rally around his cause. But the government's actions are insane and deserve to be slapped down.

The government is the puppet in this scenario. The puppetmasters ... that's who you should "gun" for. Sad state of affairs in this country when we find ourselves in a plutocracy and the elites enjoy the misdirection offered by a bumbling fool of a government while they unabashedly carry on their criminal activities in the background.

Human nature. If I come up to you and say "hey, I can give you $10,000,000 and ensure you get reelected, and all you have to do is support this bill", a lot of people are going to take that deal. And since the GOP have gone completely bat shit insane, there's very little anyone can do about it.

Ugh...I'm torn. The guy is bullshit and I don't want to rally around his cause. But the government's actions are insane and deserve to be slapped down.

Simply rally for lawful governance. If you ever had to face a judge for multiple felonies, would you rather have a judge and prosecution that followed the evidence and rule of law or did anything to get a conviction--reality and legality be damned--simply because they think you deserve it?

Don't get me wrong - I fully want him to get off, and I'm embarrassed by my government's actions.

But I just don't like the man and I don't want him to become the poster child of the future that the *AAs are fighting. He's a thief, a crook, a liar and he comes across as such.

"The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common," Dotcom said in the letter published by the Hollywood Reporter. "Instead of changing their views to fit the facts, they try to change the facts to fit their views."

While very much appropriate when talking about the MAFIAA, he might want to finish that quote:

Quote:

"Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering."

Only the RIAA/MPAA cartel and the Obama DOJ could make someone like Dotcom even come close to looking sympathetic.

STFU, do you really think a McCain administration would have handled this any differently? What indication has ANY republican given that they would or do oppose this action? Quit trying to blame the president when it was probably Biden working with AA's and NO Biden and Obama do not have to see eye to eye on this just because they were running mates.

While I'm fairly sure that he's guilty, the way in which he's being treated is definitely not acceptable and has jeopardised the entire case against him.

Really? What EVIDENCE have you seen that indicates that he is guilty? Youve seen a bunch of articles on the web, but Im willing to bet you have not seen a single shred of actual evidence, and yet you make judgement anyway. You are no better than the politicians that are railroading him.

Indeed, Hollywood would totally flock to a man who was knowingly paying uploaders to upload pirated content.

I don't think the US is doing any of this right, but I sure as fuck hope this arrogant piece of shit goes down in flames.

It seems to be the trend these days; pimp a service that's so often used for piracy, pay out your uploaders, and then when the shit hits the fan, hide behind "but the technology is legitimate, we're not responsible for the content uploaded!"

If someone was pulling that sort of scheme over your eyes personally, you'd see it. But no, because it involves Hollywood, he can't possibly be in the wrong.

To Dotcom: No good deeds go unpunished. Face the trial for the wrong Megaupload has allowed, pay a fine and carry on.

The only thing they "allowed" was users to upload and share files. Do you really expect them to police all uploads, to trace down the copyright holder for every bit of every file to see if the uploader has the legal copyright for them? And NO, fingerprinting schemes don't work, especially for file lockers and sharing sites. Unlike videos on youtube, there's no reliable way to peer into files in any of the thousands of different formats, or even encrypted archives, to determine if they have unlawfully copied content. This can ONLY be determined on a file by file basis. And just like video fingerprints, any bans that prevent uploading a file based on IDs would also prohibit all lawful uses of the file on the service as well.

I agree in part with you, I never said that there should be some sort of per file moderation. I just said that Megaupload provided some "allowance of improper sharing of copyrighted material" - by improper, I don't mean the simple upload of a file, improper means without the _required licensing_ in case of someone uploaded a third party owned file.

I don't know the terms of the original EULA for Megaupload, but it seems that the system and the EULA were a bit loose on this matter - were it not, there would be at least some sort of alert to those who were to download a file, and I don't remember seeing such warnings before getting a file from another user.

Megaupload does nothing more or less than Youtube and ALL of the other file sharing sites, except for 1 thing, 1 and 1 only, which is why they are the target of this case. They, are the ONLY site that offered 1mb/s download speeds on files up to 1gb. No other site, doing the exact same thing could compete. And as such, the PIRATES targeted MU, not the other way around. Before MU, it was Stage6.com. They shut down due to legal threats as well, even though, again, they did nothing different than Youtube, other than that they offered high quality downloads at speeds faster than 500kbs. Keep your eyes open and watch what happens over the next 10 years and you'll see the exact same BS, exact same arguments and if you look at the guy getting sued and/or shutdown, he will be one of many and stand out for one reason and one reason only, high speed access to large files.

Timothy B. Lee / Timothy covers tech policy for Ars, with a particular focus on patent and copyright law, privacy, free speech, and open government. His writing has appeared in Slate, Reason, Wired, and the New York Times.